73 replies to this topic

[aliasghark]

Ignoring the rest of your silly comments for now:

rehman, on 08 March 2012 - 03:02 AM, said:

Where?

Post #1.

Quote

Quote

Or you say 'As a Muslim, I don't touch unrelated people of the opposite gender' politely. Give people some credit, they will understand and in fact often appreciate it. They won't get upset or go mad, just because you didn't touch their hands.

With all the oppression on Muslim women that the western media shows (I'm not saying any of that is true because I know its not), that would only reaffirm their belief of the complete separation of genders in Islam hence putting them at an even greater disadvantage when it comes to choice of religion (which was another of my points that you have yet to provide justification for). They obviously won't say that to you, and no they won't go home and look it up on the Internet.

Excuse me? Can you explain what you meant in this paragraph? It makes hardly any sense as it is right now.

[Gypsy]

rehman, on 08 March 2012 - 02:09 AM, said:

Why are you so hesitant in posting said solutions? I've looked long enough, there is absolutely no shaking hands with women in Islam, this is an established fact any real Muslim would hold firm about.
Here's an example of a typical everyday situation: I go to the bank to get a new credit card (true story happened a couple days ago). The agent you have an appointment with is a female (who may or may not be at work with her husband's permission), and she puts her hand out to greet you. You naturally shake it, so as not to seem rude. You go about your business and will probably never see each other again. Little did you know, you have invoked the wrath of God.
There is definitely a line between what kind of touching may be sexually arousing and what may not be, and shaking hands is on the furthest of the non-sexual side. Tell me this- have you ever shook hands with a woman before? Probably not judging by what you've just said. Therefore you have no idea how ridiculous of a rule this is. And its not even about any sort of "line" if you really think about it. Shaking hands has been a natural human way of greeting each other for centuries.

This is only a problem when you are living in western society. In the Islamic community, the non mahram male and female do not shake hands and it is not expected for them to shake hands. And it hasn't been a problem for Muslims for at least a thousand year.

BTW, this is not just a problem with Islam. Even the hasidic Jews living in USA wont shake the hands of opposite gender. And if I am not mistaken even the Christian Amish don't shake the hands of opposite gender.

So, you think the problem is only with Islam?

[aliasghark]

kingpomba, on 07 March 2012 - 11:23 PM, said:

There are about 7 billion people in the world..1 billion muslims... 85% of people aren't muslims.

So your belief is that the majority is always right? If out of 7 billion people 5 billion were Muslims, you would accept it as right?

Quote

Theres no circumcision in the quran (God created us how he intended anyway...if he wanted us to be circumcised he would of made us born like that

You're not making much sense:
- do you believe that Muslims should only stick to what is mentioned in the Quran, and not learn from anything from anywhere else?
- do you not think it's possible God wants us to be clean and hygienic and trim our unnecessary hair for instance; do you think he wants everything to remain as it is and humans to not work on improving their state?

[zeinab94]

zeinab94, on 08 March 2012 - 03:15 AM, said:

in Islam we also believe that animals r important,, so in verse (27:18-19) there is a story to it,, Prophet Soloman AS was walking,, there was ants on the ground,, the main ant was telling the rest of the ants to go into their whole so the Prophet doesnt step on them,, then the Prophet smilled on what he saw,, then he tells Allah to order him to be grateful for what he has,,

i forgot to add something in this paragraph,,

in Islam we also believe that animals r important,, so in verse (27:18-19) there is a story to it,, Prophet Soloman AS was walking,, there was ants on the ground,, the main ant was telling the rest of the ants to go into their whole so the Prophet doesnt step on them,, then the Prophet smilled on what he saw,, because he would never step on Allah creation,, then he tells Allah to order him to be grateful for what he has,,

[aliasghark]

Quote

This is according to the rulings of all Maraajeh, who Shia Muslims are also obligated to follow.

Quote

Unfortunately that's not how it works. Ask any Muslim and they'll tell you it's just as important to follow the maraajeh as it is to follow the Quran. They come hand in hand, you're not a Muslim if you follow one and don't follow the other.

Incorrect. You can still be a Muslim. You have an option - you can learn and gain enough knowledge like the scholars (maraajas) to be able to follow your own interpretations of the Quran. Taqleed is not the only method. It is for those (majority) who don't want to dedicate the time and effort to get a mastery over our religious subjects, and would rather consult the experts when needed.

There are those who are learned enough and don't do the taqleed. They are not non-Muslims, as you claimed above.

--

As an aside, you should be more careful before declaring that all maraajas or scholars say the same thing about such and such. There are several disagreements between them (there's much larger diversity of opinion than you may think), and without carefully reviewing what each has said you can't pronounce such judgements (if you have indeed studied every marja's opinion, share what each says here).

[Pascal]

aliasghark, on 08 March 2012 - 01:06 AM, said:

You say you're here to ask questions, and then refuse to believe our clear answers (you stick to your own weird beliefs).

Now thats not really nice is it? I dont think his beliefs are anymore weird than yours. He still believes in a God, minus the organised religion. It's not like he thinks he is a God or went out and joined a cult or something, now that, WOULD be weird.

aliasghark, on 08 March 2012 - 01:06 AM, said:

Any further time I will spend on this thread will not be to try winning you back (it is very striking to see that you have so little knowledge of Islam that you were not a good Muslim even if you claim to have been a Muslim in the first place), but to clear some of your and your associate kingpomba's FUD that I can.

Hardly an associate...he still wants to believe in a God which clearly isn't my thing...and he believes in retributive justice which i most definitely despise on a level so much so that it disgusts me...

Fair point about him using Sunni hadith though...I would never go that far when you're arguing against Shi'a...

You can use sunni hadith to argue against sunni's if you like but it doesn't make much sense if you're trying to inflict wounds on the Shi'a. Granted Shi'a hadith are a lot less accessible than the sunni ones but still...

aliasghark, on 08 March 2012 - 03:34 AM, said:

So your belief is that the majority is always right? If out of 7 billion people 5 billion were Muslims, you would accept it as right?

Nope, you're taking me out of context too and you know it.

I was making a point about the argument from inconsistent revelations and the fact that if Islam is so true and so self evident, why are there so many people who don't believe it? Again, i made the point that its not reasonable to assume these people are any less smart or have any less reason than you and yet they reached a different conclusion with the very same Islam you accept. Quote it all next-time perhaps?

aliasghark, on 08 March 2012 - 03:34 AM, said:

- do you believe that Muslims should only stick to what is mentioned in the Quran, and not learn from anything from anywhere else?

Depends,

Do you:

A) Believe the Quran is perfect
Believe God is perfect

If the Quran is perfect, it is the perfect guide to live-by and contains everything you need to be a good muslim, if it doesn't, its less perfect and therefore not maximally perfect. So, either the quran has been corrupted to be less perfect or God isn't perfect. Your choice

aliasghark, on 08 March 2012 - 03:34 AM, said:

- do you not think it's possible God wants us to be clean and hygienic and trim our unnecessary hair for instance; do you think he wants everything to remain as it is and humans to not work on improving their state?

It doesn't matter how ever much you want to ascribe *your* thoughts to God. It just doesn't work that way.

Again, its a perfect book by a perfect being, it should have all the laws you need to follow in it.

God created us just the way he wanted us. As a perfect being, he could of only created us one way. A perfect being can not do something imperfect, so, we are created precisely to his will and plan.

The Quran being the perfect book says nothing about circumcision being required for religion, whilst the hadith does. Unless you're willing to admit God left something out of the Quran and it was unfinished, you have to accept such an act is not commanded by God.

Slicing off a bit of Gods creation permanantly is very different from trimming and maintaining a present body part like the hair on your head or your eyebrows.

Its the same logic behind those who prohibit tattoos, you're permanantly (concievably anyway) altering the creation of Allah.

Edited by kingpomba, 08 March 2012 - 08:41 AM.

[magma]

Rehman do you even know Arabic?

[aliasghark]

Ok kingpomba, I'll give you a few more minutes, get done with changing and editing whatever you wrote. I don't want to play your goalpost-changing game.

[aliasghark]

kingpomba, on 08 March 2012 - 08:36 AM, said:

Now thats not really nice is it? I dont think his beliefs are anymore weird than yours. He still believes in a God, minus the organised religion. It's not like he thinks he is a God or went out and joined a cult or something, now that, WOULD be weird.

The point of the sentence you quoted was that rehman claims he wants answers to questions, but in reality refuses the answers we provide (as to the peripheral part you picked up, I was talking of his beliefs about Islam, not other general beliefs; reading a few lines before it would have made this clear to you).

Quote

Hardly an associate...he still wants to believe in a God which clearly isn't my thing...and he believes in retributive justice which i most definitely despise on a level so much so that it disgusts me...

I was of course talking about him and you being associates in spreading FUD about Islam. This is not hard to understand from my paragraph.

Quote

Fair point about him using Sunni hadith though...I would never go that far when you're arguing against Shi'a...
You can use sunni hadith to argue against sunni's if you like but it doesn't make much sense if you're trying to inflict wounds on the Shi'a.

I see you are capable enough to understand what he's trying to do.

Quote

Granted Shi'a hadith are a lot less accessible than the sunni ones but still...

Do you have any basis to believe this?

Quote

Nope, you're taking me out of context too and you know it.

I was making a point about the argument from inconsistent revelations and the fact that if Islam is so true and so self evident, why are there so many people who don't believe it? Again, i made the point that its not reasonable to assume these people are any less smart or have any less reason than you and yet they reached a different conclusion with the very same Islam you accept. Quote it all next-time perhaps?

How was I taking it out of context? Ok, here is the whole thing for your reference:

Quote

Quote

Jihadi, on 08 March 2012 - 03:21 AM, said:
in this life either you choose the right path or the wrong path, and you will never ever find any other religion better and so pure then islam,

How are we to establish its actually the right path though? There are about 7 billion people in the world..1 billion muslims... 85% of people aren't muslims. If it is so right and so much better, whats with all the other people not believing it? Its unreasonable to assume they're no less smart or reasonable or look for truth any less than you do and yet, they reached a different outcome..

I've read large portions of the Quran and i know about the muslim faith and i dont find it particularly enthralling. So, its not as if everyone out there isn't a muslim simply because they haven't read the Quran or just haven't heard about it.

The quran tells you its the right path but thats comming from the book that tells you to believe...in the book...

It's like me claiming to be a world famous billionaire chess player who wrestles bears. Your only proof for this? A book i wrote telling you i was a world famous billionaire chess player who wrestles bears and the book tells you to believe the book...

See the issue?

What is your point if not 'the proof of something being right is the percentage of people accepting it'?

Jihadi said 1. we either choose the right or wrong path, and 2. Islam is better than other religions. To which you responded that only 1 out of 7 billion people are Muslims.

You said it is unreasonable to assume people who aren't Muslims are not smart, and you cited yourself as an example.

I don't want to talk about you specifically (and make it a personal attack), but more generally, there are a few other reasons I can think of why everyone is not a Muslim. The most easy one is - it can be that people haven't studied Islam more deeply than than the typical news soundbites (terrorism! cult! outdated! arabs! islamists! bin laden! evil! outdated! iran! bombs!).

Quote

Depends,

Do you:

A) Believe the Quran is perfect
Believe God is perfect

If the Quran is perfect, it is the perfect guide to live-by and contains everything you need to be a good muslim, if it doesn't, its less perfect and therefore not maximally perfect. So, either the quran has been corrupted to be less perfect or God isn't perfect. Your choice

Huh, you seem to like the word 'perfect' very much (though your usage of it indicates your understanding of it is simplistic; you almost appear to be more convinced of the 'perfection' of God and the Quran than Muslims).

Why do you believe that the Quran has to talk about every single thing in detail, to be 'perfect'? That would be impractical - the book would never end. God made the book as well as role models, the Prophets and Imams, available for humanity to learn from.

[rehman]

Quote

(by the way, for others: more generally, fruits and vegetables are halal, rice, wheat, milk, etc are halal - the word 'halal' means permissible, it's not only about humane treatment of animals, and is not some extremely difficult thing to live by as rehman tries to mislead into believing)

What I was trying to say was that Zabiha meat may in some ways be considered more 'humane' in theory, but we have no proof that this is perfectly practiced in zabiha farms. We do have reason to believe that it isn't, however, because doing so would be both cost and time inefficient. You don't have to tell me the purpose of everything, I already know why zabiha is supposed to be considered more humane. Let's not get too carried away by this, this is not a main part of my discussion. It was just an example of some of the unnecessary obligations in Islam. I don't know where you live, but I live somewhere where I have to drive at least 15-20km to have access to any halal food, which granted isn't "extremely hard", but it is an unnecessary nuisance.
I'm not the one trying to mislead people, you're the one trying so hard to make people think there are no flaws in Islam when there clearly are, as I will continue to discuss.

Quote

People here do know that all non-Muslims are not evil or deserving of hell.

Ok, let me elaborate more on the word "non-Muslim". A "non-Muslim" is someone who doesn't believe in Allah/does shirk (i.e. believes he has a son etc), and/or doesn't believe in the Day of Judgement and/or Prophet Muhammad as the last messenger. zeinab94 has posted a verse that is very self-contradictory to the one I posted, but let's assume the other one was taken out of context. Even in this verse, it is necessary for the person to be 1) A Christian who doesn't believe Jesus is the son of God. 2) A Jew. What about Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Atheists? You really shouldn't need me to 'prove' to you the consequences of even the tiniest bit of shirk, or are you going to go and accuse me of refusing to accept your "clear" answers again?

Quote

And I'm not making assumptions, you said so yourself in your initial posts.

It would be nice if I managed to convince someone that Islam is a lie and they don't need to live in constant fear anymore, but this is not why I am here.

Quote

Similarly there r Jews who meet the same requirements,, and no doubt there r people of other faiths who also do the same,, for eg following the same fundermental principles as the Quran commands,,

The most fundamental of which is that absolutely no shirk is allowed. Which brings us back to where we started? What about people who do commit shirk, which is theoretically every single non-Muslim. What you and aliasghark are trying to do here is describing a Muslim and then saying he is in fact non-Muslim. Like a Christian that doesn't believe Jesus is the son of God, and follows all the fundamental rules of the Quran. Can he really be called a Christian then?

Quote

as for the story u quoted,, i have heard similar stories,, Allah created us and He wants us to cover our beauty,, you NEED to understand Islam better to understand that story,, Quran tells us that he made us Equal,, u have to also know that this life is a trial,,

Again, the brutal punishments aren't justified. The Quran doesn't in fact give men and women equal status. That comes from Hadith and other sources which obviously all come from 'dubious' sources.

"Women who are divorced shall wait, keeping themselves apart, three (monthly) courses. And it is not lawful for them that they should conceal that which Allah hath created in their wombs if they are believers in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands would do better to take them back in that case if they desire a reconciliation. And they (women) have rights similar to those (of men) over them in kindness, and men are a degree above them. Allah is Mighty, Wise." (2:228)
This is the Pickthall translation. Other translations put something like "in responsibilty" in brackets, again emphasizing that "scholars" just twist and interpret the verses any way they want that makes the raw text sound more justifiable.

"Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great." (4:34)
You will not find a single verse where women are allowed to 'punish' their husbands in any way. This is the one of the clearest verses you can get from the Quran, I don't know how you can twist it and turn it into something that fits the situation.

Quote

Ignoring the rest of your silly comments for now:

Well played.

Quote

Post #1.

So right on the first post, when no one else had posted, I've been refusing to accept rational discussion. Cheers to that logic.

Quote

Excuse me? Can you explain what you meant in this paragraph? It makes hardly any sense as it is right now.

Or do you refuse to make any sense out of it?
1) The western media thinks Islam oppresses women.
2) You refuse to shake hands with a women, by telling her "my religion doesn't allow me to touch unrelated women".
3) What is the logical conclusion a non-Muslim would make from this? (a) Islam really does give strange treatment to women ( Wow! I have always felt like I was being objectified when I shook hands with a man! Islam rules!
4) They will have a more negative view of Islam (provided you chose (a) above)
5) They will be less likely to convert to Islam (or stop believing Jesus is the son of God if they are Christian), hence more likely to go to hell.

Quote

This is only a problem when you are living in western society. In the Islamic community, the non mahram male and female do not shake hands and it is not expected for them to shake hands. And it hasn't been a problem for Muslims for at least a thousand year.

BTW, this is not just a problem with Islam. Even the hasidic Jews living in USA wont shake the hands of opposite gender. And if I am not mistaken even the Christian Amish don't shake the hands of opposite gender.

So, you think the problem is only with Islam?

And there are many Muslims who live in the western society. I obviously never needed to shake hands with a women when I was in Qatar, but now I live here and its the norm. I've also shook hands with Jewish women (sounds like I'm on a hand-shaking escapade).
No I'm not saying the problem is with Islam. My problem is with all religions.

EDIT: The information here on was edited on, I forgot to reply to the rest of the comments. I haven't changed any of the above.

Quote

- do you believe that Muslims should only stick to what is mentioned in the Quran, and not learn from anything from anywhere else?

What other choice to we have when every other source is 'dubious'?

Quote

in Islam we also believe that animals r important,, so in verse (27:18-19) there is a story to it,, Prophet Soloman AS was walking,, there was ants on the ground,, the main ant was telling the rest of the ants to go into their whole so the Prophet doesnt step on them,, then the Prophet smilled on what he saw,, because he would never step on Allah creation,, then he tells Allah to order him to be grateful for what he has,,

So this is just a children's fairy tale that didn't really happen as it was told, but in actuality it was just a bunch of ants moving around? The point is scientifically ants can't "talk", certainly not to people.

Quote

There are those who are learned enough and don't do the taqleed. They are not non-Muslims, as you claimed above.

To qualify for that, you don't just need to read a few things from here and there so that anyone can be exempt from taqleed. You have to dedicate your entire life to Islam, as the maraajas do.
I was under the taqleed of Ayatullah Sistani (who I'm sure you agree is one of the greatest Shia scholars, don't say this is another ridiculous source). I can't find a ruling for apostacy in his books, but I found this:
Q195: If they are serious and intend to slander Allah (s.w.t.), the Prophet (S), the Imams (a.s.), religion or school of law (madhhab) and persist in this.
A: The ruling upon them is death. (FM, p. 419)
This is in his book "Contemporary Legal Rulings", under Mueamalat (Part 8).

Quote

Rehman do you even know Arabic?

I can read, and write, and having lived in the middle east for some time, can also understand the basics. But what do you mean do I even know Arabic? Is it ridiculous to be a Muslim and not know Arabic?

Quote

The point of the sentence you quoted was that rehman claims he wants answers to questions, but in reality refuses the answers we provide

No, the fact of the matter is that you think that every answer you provide is a "clear and rational" explanation to all my questions. When I provide a legitimate counter-argument, you say I refuse to accept rational discussion.

Quote

I don't want to talk about you specifically (and make it a personal attack), but more generally, there are a few other reasons I can think of why everyone is not a Muslim. The most easy one is - it can be that people haven't studied Islam more deeply than than the typical news soundbites (terrorism! cult! outdated! arabs! islamists! bin laden! evil! outdated! iran! bombs!).

I think the point he made was very valid, and you are just trying to escape rational discussion. He says he read the Quran cover to cover, and didn't find it particularly impressive or the ultimate answer to all of humanity's problems (which Muslims claim it is). What would be to go deeper than that? Read books of Ahadith? What about the fact that these all come from ridiculous sources? Books on commentary of the Quran? Is this not just one person's interpretation of the words in the Quran that can be twisted into an entirely different explanation by another person? The truth is the deepest one should need to go in the study of Islam is read it in its raw form. If it was really a book for all of mankind, it wouldn't need a philosopher to decrypt its code.

Edited by rehman, 08 March 2012 - 04:08 PM.

[Lanatin]

This is the most pathetic thread to yet appear in the philosophy subforum, very degenerate and nothing substantial to take note of.

The dynamic duo above pretty much sets the seal on things, the trashpit sure has been missing out on large quantities of compost these days.

Edited by La'nat Ma Man, 08 March 2012 - 06:26 PM.

[rehman]

Quote

There are many absurd rulings in Islam, but I don't think they are Islamic at all. They come from fallible narratives, with a weak chain, and the clergymen just accept them without rationally analysing them with reasoning.

Nowadays, scholars just give cut and paste, canned on the shelf answers that simply fail the test of rationality. I don't think the problem is with Islam, but how people interpret it.

The reason I would never leave Islam is due to the event of Ashura. The grandson of the Holy Prophet of Islam took his own friends and family to the battlefield to fight against a tyrant for justice. This is Islam to me.

The "Islamic rules aren't Islamic" is a textbook response you will get from a Muslim when trying to justify absurd rulings. The truth is these rulings are still generally accepted, but a lot of them are very specific and don't apply to everyday life (like laws regarding blasphemy and apostacy), so Muslims don't even acknowledge their existence. Like in one of the first few responses I got in this thread, the guy started off with the typical reply you are likely to get at an Islamic forum for starting an anti-Islamic topic (also see the one right above me), then went on to say "I don't know how you use Islamic punishments as an anti-Islamic point since most Muslim countries do not practice them." The justifications they give are "its not in the Quran" or "youre getting that from ridiculous sources", but they'd be happy to see the same source being used on the pro-Islamic side of the argument or any other debate that doesn't threaten their belief. I for example have quoted from only the best Shia sources, even refraining from using the Bihar al Anwar even though I found many Hadith supporting my claims in it, and am aware that it is widely used by Shia scholars for other purposes, but only because I know such sources aren't the most authentic. I am not here as a propagandist to mislead people, if that is what I wanted I would go to some Sunni forum where I could throw all their ridiculous Sahih Muslim Hadith at them. I came here for answers, and all I've gotten so far is personal attacks at an attempt to end the discussion, or accusations of "not wanting to follow a rational discussion" or "using ridiculous sources" without saying which one they were talking about.
I guess its just that choosing to leave a religion, or even allowing your faith to weaken is huge risk that most people aren't willing to take no matter how much proof you throw at them. Not to mention most Muslims don't even follow Islam properly. You sound like one of those people. Saying any book is better than the Quran is a major sin, I'm pretty sure that counts as blasphemy in fact. You probably also shake hands with the opposite gender, and may or may not pray 5 times a day (I'm just making assumptions based on your post, correct me if I'm wrong), and don't wear Hijab. Such Muslims don't feel the need to leave Islam because they are not letting it stop them from leading a normal life. You can't just like certain aspects of Islam and call yourself a Muslim. The kind of Muslim I grew up being, practicing every single obligation and staying away from every single Haram, with your parents keeping a close eye on you to make sure you do, I'll tell you it's not fun. And that is the real Islam, I don't blame my parents for anything, all they want for me is to protect me from what they think will lead to eternal torture.

[zeinab94]

@rehman

u just dont want to believe us,,  u ignore most of what i say because u know its true,,

i give this Surah to people i debate with that r like u,,

Surah 109:

Say, "O disbelievers,
I do not worship what you worship.
Nor are you worshippers of what i worship.
Nor will i be a worshipper of what you worship.
Nor will you be a worshipper of what i worship.
For you is your religion, and for me is my religion."

[rehman]

Quote

u just dont want to believe us,, u ignore most of what i say because u know its true,,

Again, typical. It's funny you say that even though I replied to every single point you made in your last posts. I included part of my response to your comments about "Christians that follow the fundamental rules of Quran" in the part where I responded to aliasghark. Read my entire posts, not just the part where I quote you.

Edited by rehman, 08 March 2012 - 08:03 PM.

[magma]

Rehman you appear so certain in your opinions on verses and narrations as if you have "figured it out".  

I only want to know if you know enough Arabic to back up the big talk.

Edited by magma, 09 March 2012 - 02:16 AM.

[rehman]

Quote

Rehman you appear so certain in your opinions on verses and narrations as if you have "figured it out".

I only want to know if you know enough Arabic to back up the big talk.

Lolwat. Are you for real?

EDIT: Ok, I'm not going to drop to the same level as some of the other people here and try to insult you without providing any explanation. There's this new thing called inter-languages translation, it's been all the rage lately. You should try it.

Edited by rehman, 09 March 2012 - 04:08 AM.

[aliasghark]

Ok, as a reminder: rehman won't accept your answers, he will claim to know Islam better than you.

If you give him proof from the holy Quran, he says that most Muslims and Islamic countries don't follow those verses.
If you give him proof from Muslims and Islamic countries, he says it goes against his chosen verses of the holy Quran.

Get the hint people, he is not here for answers but to misguide others. rehman hasn't even answered straight the simplest of all questions posed to him - 'do you know Arabic', he says in his edited reply that there is a 'new thing called inter-languages translation'.

[zeinab94]

Anyway,,
your saying Allah made boys to rule girls,, then i suppose that the following verses r imaginary in the Quran:

(49:13) O mankind, indeed we have created you from male and female and made you people and tribes that you may know each other. Indeed the most noble of you in sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is knowing and Acquainted.  
Where does it mention that boys are greater then girls ? it obviously shows that Allah doesnt care what gender you are,, it matters how righteous your are,,

(4:1) O mankind, fear your lord, who created you from one soul and created from it its mate and dispersed from both of them many men and women. And fear Allah, through whom you ask one another, and the wombs. Indeed Allah is ever, over you, an observer.
Where does it mention that boys are greater than girls ? its telling us that both girls and boys r made from the same soul,,

(3:195) And their Lord responded to them, "Never will I allow to be lost the work of [any] worker among you, whether male or female; you are of one another. So those who emigrated or who evicted or were evicted by their homes or were harmed in My cause or fought or were killed- I will surely remove from them their misdeeds, and i will surely admit them to gardens beneath which rivers flow as reward from Allah, and Allah has with him the best reward."

(4:19) O you who have believed, it is not lawful for you to inherit women by compulsion, And do not make difficulties for them in order to take [back] part of what you gave them unless they commit a clear immorality. And live with them in kindness. For if you dislike them - perhaps you dislike a thing and Allah makes therein much good.

(16:97) Whoever does righteousness, whether male or female, while he is a believer - We will surely cause him to live a good life, and We will surely give them their reward [in the Hereafter] according to the best of what they used to do.

(30:21) And of His signs is that He created for you from yourselves mates that you may find tranquility in them; and He places between you affection and mercy. Indeed in that are signs for a people who give thought.

You have heard heaps of olden day stories,, have you heard the one about the Arabs who would bury their new born baby just because she was a girl ?? Well this verse was send out at that time:
(81:8-9) And when the girl [who was] buried alive is asked. For what sin she was killed.

Note that the above r just a few of the Ayahs that mention women as equal,,

you have interpreted this verse Wrong (2:228) its saying that if a divorced women is pregnant then she isnt allowed to keep it from her husband,, she has to wait 3months and in that 3months she can get back with her husband if she wants reconciliation.





as for (4:34) this website explains it good http://www.islamicpe.../Quran-4-34.htm







Can i understand something,, r u saying that if someone commits Shirk but there still good righteous people,, that they still go to hell,, because one of the main things in Islam is not to believe in Shirk ??????
you should always remember how there are 7levels of Heaven,, and Allah always says that he is Always Forgiving and Always Merciful,,

[magma]

rehman, on 09 March 2012 - 04:03 AM, said:

Lolwat. Are you for real?

EDIT: Ok, I'm not going to drop to the same level as some of the other people here and try to insult you without providing any explanation. There's this new thing called inter-languages translation, it's been all the rage lately. You should try it.

You know that languages are not 100% complementary.  There are terms in Arabic that can have dozens of English equivalents.  Which one is accurate?  Does it even matter at this point anymore?  Maybe?  If your beliefs about Islam are based on personal opinions on English translations, maybe this is indicative of how serious you are about learning.  Clearly some other less academic factors are influencing your decision here.  Be honest.

You seem to be a very angry man.  Enamored with Western secular modernity and scientific rationalism.  Jealousy towards the happy and well-fed and contempt towards perverted and confused post-colonial Muslim sociologies.  Overwhelmed with hypocrisy at every corner.  An Islam that won't fit in with the glitters of the modern world.  People who claim a religion but are furthest from it.  We all understand this.

But not everyone who worships modernity leaves Islam.  Nor do most nominally claim that Islam is the cause of social ills rather than a solution, as you are implying. Even the most secularized pay lip service.  Because it's popular and leads to legitimacy.  Where does this legitimacy come from?  After 1400 years, claiming to be Muslim continues to score political points with masses.  

So you are definitely riding the wave against a lot of humanity.

It's your own free will.  Don't waste it here. Get on with your rational modern life and be its representative.  Be the next Ali Sina and make us proud.

[rehman]

Quote

Ok, as a reminder: rehman won't accept your answers, he will claim to know Islam better than you.

If you give him proof from the holy Quran, he says that most Muslims and Islamic countries don't follow those verses.
If you give him proof from Muslims and Islamic countries, he says it goes against his chosen verses of the holy Quran.

Get the hint people, he is not here for answers but to misguide others. rehman hasn't even answered straight the simplest of all questions posed to him - 'do you know Arabic', he says in his edited reply that there is a 'new thing called inter-languages translation'.

Ok you've obviously given up. Throughout this entire thread, you've only chosen to give "answers" to my points that you find most convenient. When I pose a question or a counter-argument to one of your answers that you can't find an answer for, its always the same "I gave you a clear answer, you are trying to escape rational discussion". Quran and what Muslims really practice in real life go hand to hand, you can't say "this isn't in the Quran hence it's not a part of Islam" or "this is in the Quran but most Muslim countries don't practice it hence it's not a part of Islam". The Quran doesn't tell you anything, it tells you to pray, tells you to pay zakat, but doesn't tell you exactly how to do these things. All that comes from tradition and Hadith. You can't possibly separate them.
The fact that you support the 'you don't know Arabic' point is further proof of your blindness in judgement when it comes to someone supporting your own beliefs, and disagreement with every single logical point I make just because it isn't supportive of your faith.

@ zeinab94
The verses you posted are all talking about the equality of women when it comes to piety and righteousness, which I never refuted in the first place. However when it comes to social status, Quran says the men are higher. Again, why is it that men are allowed to punish their wives but wives are not allowed to punish their husbands in any way shape or form?
Here is something from the link you posted:

Quote

1) "Because God has favored some of them more than others". It is not explicitly stated here who is favored more than whom but in view of the context it is probable that men are understood in some way to be favored more than women. But in what way? Again no answer is given in the verse under consideration or elsewhere in the Qur'an. But we can justifiably take the reference to physical strength and energy in which men generally excel women and which enables men to guard women against some of the dangers to which they may be exposed in society and to take care of some of their needs.

A classic example of someone twisting the verses into whatever meaning they want. Again another point I've been emphasizing throughout this discussion, is that when the Quran is read in its raw form, it doesn't make sense. What was it to Allah to add another 2 words "in strength" to this verse if he knew that it would lead to controversy in the future? When read in its raw form, this verse clearly reads that men are better than women, and men are allowed to beat their wives (again, it doesn't say anything about "how" you beat them, that's what the "scholars" decided later on).

Quote

You know that languages are not 100% complementary. There are terms in Arabic that can have dozens of English equivalents. Which one is accurate? Does it even matter at this point anymore? Maybe? If your beliefs about Islam are based on personal opinions on English translations, maybe this is indicative of how serious you are about learning. Clearly some other less academic factors are influencing your decision here. Be honest.

No one can understand the language of the Quran in full, not even today's Arabs who speak Arabic as their first language. You're saying translations are personal opinions? Personal opinions is what Muslims believe in, i.e. the commentary of the Quran where scholars present their "opinion" on the interpretation of the verses to make them sound more justified, like in the link zeinab94 posted above.
I can't believe you even made this point, and are now defending it. Translations are straight word to word transformations of one language into another, there is no opinion involved. Suppose you were trying to help someone who didn't speak Arabic convert to Islam, would you not provide them with translations? Or would you tell them they have to learn the Arabic of the Quran before they have any chance of being Muslim. What about all the translations your Muslim brothers and sisters have provided throughout this conversation? This is a ridiculous point you made, I'm having difficulty even explaining it.
I'm pretty sure this was another "clear and rational" point like all the others I've been presented with to aliasghark and all other still Muslims on this thread, and I'm the bigot who refuses to accept such rational discussion.

Quote

After 1400 years, claiming to be Muslim continues to score political points with masses.

Again, you are coming up with claims out of nowhere that have no truth or validity. When Obama was elected, a large number of Americans criticized him for being Muslim (even though he isn't). None of them voted for him on the basis that he is a Muslim (or so they thought).

[Gypsy]

rehman, on 09 March 2012 - 03:21 PM, said:

Again, why is it that men are allowed to punish their wives but wives are not allowed to punish their husbands in any way shape or form?
Here is something from the link you posted:

This is a good question. I don't know of any way a wife can punish her husband. I guess Islam wants husband and wife to live in peace without violence.

What kind of punishment were you thinking? For what possible offences?

[magma]

rehman, on 09 March 2012 - 03:21 PM, said:

No one can understand the language of the Quran in full, not even today's Arabs who speak Arabic as their first language. You're saying translations are personal opinions? Personal opinions is what Muslims believe in, i.e. the commentary of the Quran where scholars present their "opinion" on the interpretation of the verses to make them sound more justified, like in the link zeinab94 posted above.
I can't believe you even made this point, and are now defending it. Translations are straight word to word transformations of one language into another, there is no opinion involved. Suppose you were trying to help someone who didn't speak Arabic convert to Islam, would you not provide them with translations? Or would you tell them they have to learn the Arabic of the Quran before they have any chance of being Muslim. What about all the translations your Muslim brothers and sisters have provided throughout this conversation? This is a ridiculous point you made, I'm having difficulty even explaining it.
I'm pretty sure this was another "clear and rational" point like all the others I've been presented with to aliasghark and all other still Muslims on this thread, and I'm the bigot who refuses to accept such rational discussion.

Your personal opinion is what you extract from the translation, and is subjected to your modern day cultural bias.

Do you know of any scholars of classical Arabic who agree with your interpretations?  Any sources?  References?

rehman, on 09 March 2012 - 03:21 PM, said:

Again, you are coming up with claims out of nowhere that have no truth or validity. When Obama was elected, a large number of Americans criticized him for being Muslim (even though he isn't). None of them voted for him on the basis that he is a Muslim (or so they thought).

I am referring to Muslim majority societies.

[zeinab94]

rehman, on 09 March 2012 - 03:21 PM, said:

@ zeinab94
The verses you posted are all talking about the equality of women when it comes to piety and righteousness, which I never refuted in the first place. However when it comes to social status, Quran says the men are higher. Again, why is it that men are allowed to punish their wives but wives are not allowed to punish their husbands in any way shape or form?
Here is something from the link you posted:

A classic example of someone twisting the verses into whatever meaning they want. Again another point I've been emphasizing throughout this discussion, is that when the Quran is read in its raw form, it doesn't make sense. What was it to Allah to add another 2 words "in strength" to this verse if he knew that it would lead to controversy in the future? When read in its raw form, this verse clearly reads that men are better than women, and men are allowed to beat their wives (again, it doesn't say anything about "how" you beat them, that's what the "scholars" decided later on).

read the link i gave you PROPERLY,, it doesnt say that a man can hit his wife,,

[ateef]

Because you  are deaf, dumb and blind...